DOCSLIB.ORG

Genetic Contributions to Variation in General Cognitive Function: a Meta-Analysis of Genome-Wide Association Studies in the CHARGE Consortium (N=53 949)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Genetic Contributions to Variation in General Cognitive Function: a Meta-Analysis of Genome-Wide Association Studies in the CHARGE Consortium (N=53 949) Genetic contributions to variation in general cognitive function: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in the CHARGE consortium (N=53 949) The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Davies, G., N. Armstrong, J. C. Bis, J. Bressler, V. Chouraki, S. Giddaluru, E. Hofer, et al. 2015. “Genetic contributions to variation in general cognitive function: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in the CHARGE consortium (N=53 949).” Molecular Psychiatry 20 (2): 183-192. doi:10.1038/mp.2014.188. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/mp.2014.188. Published Version doi:10.1038/mp.2014.188 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:14351196 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA OPEN Molecular Psychiatry (2015) 20, 183–192 © 2015 Macmillan Publishers Limited All rights reserved 1359-4184/15 www.nature.com/mp IMMEDIATE COMMUNICATION Genetic contributions to variation in general cognitive function: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in the CHARGE consortium (N = 53 949) G Davies1,2, N Armstrong3, JC Bis4, J Bressler5, V Chouraki6,7, S Giddaluru8,9, E Hofer10,11, CA Ibrahim-Verbaas12,13, M Kirin14, J Lahti15,16, SJ van der Lee13, S Le Hellard8,9, T Liu17,18, RE Marioni1,19,20, C Oldmeadow21, I Postmus22,23, AV Smith24,25, JA Smith26, A Thalamuthu27, R Thomson28, V Vitart29, J Wang30,31,LYu32, L Zgaga33,34, W Zhao26, R Boxall19, SE Harris1,19, WD Hill2, DC Liewald1, M Luciano1,2, H Adams35,36, D Ames37,38, N Amin13,36, P Amouyel6, AA Assareh27,RAu7,30, JT Becker39,40,41, A Beiser7,30, C Berr42,43, L Bertram18,44, E Boerwinkle5,45,46, BM Buckley47, H Campbell14, J Corley2, PL De Jager48,49,50, C Dufouil51,52, JG Eriksson16,53,54,55, T Espeseth56,57, JD Faul58, I Ford59, Generation Scotland60, RF Gottesman61, ME Griswold62, V Gudnason24,25, TB Harris63, G Heiss64, A Hofman35,36, EG Holliday21, J Huffman29, SLR Kardia26, N Kochan27,65, DS Knopman66, JB Kwok67,68, J-C Lambert6, T Lee27,65,GLi4, S-C Li17,69, M Loitfelder10, OL Lopez39, AJ Lundervold70,71,72, A Lundqvist73, KA Mather27, SS Mirza35,36, L Nyberg73,74,75, BA Oostra13, A Palotie76,77,78, G Papenberg17,79, A Pattie2, K Petrovic10, O Polasek80, BM Psaty4,81,82,83, P Redmond2, S Reppermund27, JI Rotter84,85, H Schmidt10,86, M Schuur12,13, PW Schofield87, RJ Scott21, VM Steen8,9, DJ Stott88, JC van Swieten12, KD Taylor84,89, J Trollor27,90, S Trompet22,91, AG Uitterlinden35,36,92, G Weinstein7,30, E Widen77, BG Windham93, JW Jukema91,94,95, AF Wright29, MJ Wright96, Q Yang30,31, H Amieva52, JR Attia21, DA Bennett32, H Brodaty27,97, AJM de Craen22,23, C Hayward29, MA Ikram12,35,36,98, U Lindenberger17, L-G Nilsson99, DJ Porteous1,19,60, K Räikkönen15, I Reinvang57, I Rudan14, PS Sachdev27,65, R Schmidt10, PR Schofield100,101, V Srikanth28,102, JM Starr1,103, ST Turner104, DR Weir58, JF Wilson14, C van Duijn13,36, L Launer63, AL Fitzpatrick81,105, S Seshadri7,30, TH Mosley Jr93 and IJ Deary1,2 1Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK; 2Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK; 3School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 4Cardiovascular Health Research Unit, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; 5Human Genetics Center, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA; 6Inserm-UMR744, Institut Pasteur de Lille, Unité d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, Lille, France; 7Department of Neurology, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA; 8K.G. Jebsen Centre for Psychosis Research and the Norwegian Centre for Mental Disorders Research (NORMENT), Department of Clinical Science, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; 9Dr Einar Martens Research Group for Biological Psychiatry, Center for Medical Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway; 10Department of Neurology, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria; 11Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Documentation, Medical University of Graz, Graz, Austria; 12Department of Neurology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; 13Genetic Epidemiology Unit, Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; 14Centre for Population Health Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK; 15Institute of Behavioural Sciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; 16Folkhälsan Research Centre, Helsinki, Finland; 17Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany; 18Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, Berlin, Germany; 19Medical Genetics Section, University of Edinburgh Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK; 20Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia; 21Hunter Medical Research Institute and Faculty of Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW, Australia; 22Department of Gerontology and Geriatrics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; 23Netherlands Consortium for Healthy Ageing, Leiden, The Netherlands; 24Icelandic Heart Association, Kopavogur, Iceland; 25University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland; 26Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; 27Centre for Healthy Brain Ageing, School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 28Menzies Research Institute, Hobart, Tasmania; 29MRC Human Genetics Unit, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK; 30Framingham Heart Study, Framingham, MA, USA; 31Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA; 32Rush Alzheimer's Disease Center, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA; 33Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; 34Andrija Stampar School of Public Health, Medical School, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia; 35Department of Epidemiology, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; 36Netherlands Consortium for Healthy Ageing, Leiden, The Netherlands; 37National Ageing Research Institute, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; 38Academic Unit for Psychiatry of Old Age, St George’s Hospital, University of Melbourne, Kew, Australia; 39Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 40Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 41Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA; 42Inserm, U106, Montpellier, France; 43Université Montpellier I, Montpellier, France; 44Faculty of Medicine, School of Public Health, Imperial College, London, UK; 45Brown Foundation Institute of Molecular Medicine for the Prevention of Human Diseases, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA; 46Human Genome Sequencing Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA; 47Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland; 48Program in Translational NeuroPsychiatric Genomics, Department of Neurology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA; 49Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; 50Program in Medical and Population Genetics, Broad Institute, Cambridge, MA, USA; 51Inserm U708, Neuroepidemiology, Paris, France; 52Inserm U897, Université Bordeaux Segalen, Bordeaux, France; 53National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland; 54Department of General Practice and Primary health Care, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland; 55Unit of General Practice, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; 56K.G. Jebsen Centre for Psychosis Research, Norwegian Centre For Mental Disorders Research (NORMENT), Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital and Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 57Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; 58Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; 59Robertson Center for Biostatistics, Glasgow, UK; 60Generation Scotland, University of Edinburgh Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine, Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Western General Hospital, Edinburgh, UK; 61Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; 62Center of Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA; 63Intramural Research Program National Institutes on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA; 64Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, NC, USA; 65Neuropsychiatric Institute, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 66Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; 67Neuroscience Research Australia, Randwick, NSW, Australia; 68School of Medical Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; 69Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany; 70Department of Biological and Medical Psychology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway; 71Kavli Research Centre for Aging and Dementia, Haraldsplass
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Identifying Intergenerational Risk Factors for ADHD Symptoms Using Polygenic Scores in the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort
    medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.02.16.21251737; this version posted February 20, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . Intergenerational transmission of ADHD Identifying intergenerational risk factors for ADHD symptoms using polygenic scores in the Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Jean-Baptiste Pingault1,2*, Wikus Barkhuizen1*, Biyao Wang1, Laurie J. Hannigan3,4, Espen Moen Eilertsen6, Ole A. Andreassen7, Helga Ask5, Martin Tesli5,7, Ragna Bugge Askeland4,5, George Davey Smith4,9, Neil Davies4,8,9, Ted Reichborn-Kjennerud5, †Eivind Ystrom5,6, †Alexandra Havdahl3,5,6 *Equal first authors †Equal last authors 1 Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom 2 MRC Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King’s College, London, United Kingdom 3 Nic Waals Institute, Lovisenberg Diaconal Hospital, Oslo, Norway 4 Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, BS8 2BN, United Kingdom 5 Department of Mental Disorders, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway 6 PROMENTA Research Center, Department of Psychology, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway 7 NORMENT Centre, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo and Division of Mental Health and Addiction, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway 8 K.G. Jebsen Center for Genetic Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Nursing, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway 9 Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Barley House, Oakfield Grove, Bristol, BS8 2BN, United Kingdom Address correspondence to Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Common Genetic Variation and Schizophrenia Polygenic Risk
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Neuropsychiatric Genetics Common Genetic Variation and Schizophrenia Polygenic Risk Influence Neurocognitive Performance in Young Adulthood Alex Hatzimanolis,1 Pallav Bhatnagar,2 Anna Moes,2 Ruihua Wang,1 Panos Roussos,3,4 Panos Bitsios,5 Costas N. Stefanis,6 Ann E. Pulver,1 Dan E. Arking,2 Nikolaos Smyrnis,6,7 Nicholas C. Stefanis,6,7 and Dimitrios Avramopoulos1,2* 1Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 2McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland 3Department of Psychiatry, Friedman Brain Institute and Department of Genetics and Genomics Science, Institute of Multiscale Biology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York 4James J. Peters Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Bronx, New York, New York 5Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece 6University Mental Health Research Institute, Athens, Greece 7Department of Psychiatry, Eginition Hospital, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece Manuscript Received: 3 December 2014; Manuscript Accepted: 29 April 2015 Neurocognitive abilities constitute complex traits with consid- erable heritability. Impaired neurocognition is typically ob- How to Cite this Article: served in schizophrenia (SZ), whereas convergent evidence Hatzimanolis A, Bhatnagar P, Moes A, has shown shared genetic determinants between neurocognition Wang R, Roussos P, Bitsios P, Stefanis CN, and SZ. Here, we report a genome-wide association study Pulver AE, Arking DE, Smyrnis N, Stefanis (GWAS) on neuropsychological and oculomotor traits, linked NC, Avramopoulos D. 2015. Common to SZ, in a general population sample of healthy young males Genetic Variation and Schizophrenia ¼ (n 1079).
    [Show full text]
  • Polygenic Methods and Their Application to Psychiatric Traits
    This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Wray, N. R., & Visscher, P. M. (2015). Quantitative genetics of disease traits. Wray, N. R., Lee, S. H., Mehta, D., Vinkhuyzen, A. A., Dudbridge, F., & Middeldorp, C. M. (2014). Research review: polygenic methods and their application to psychiatric traits. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 55(10), 1068–1087. DOI: 10.1111/jcpp.12295 . This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for self-archiving. Polygenic methods and their application to psychiatric traits Naomi R Wray1*, S Hong Lee1, Divya Mehta1, Anna AE Vinkhuyzen1, Frank Dudbridge2, Christel M Middeldorp3,4 1. The University of Queensland, Queensland Brain Institute, Queensland, Australia 4068 2. Department of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK 3. Department of Biological Psychology, Neuroscience Campus Amsterdam, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands 4. Department of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, GGZ inGeest/VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands * Corresponding author. [email protected] Abstract Background Despite evidence from twin and family studies for an important contribution of genetic factors to both childhood and adult onset psychiatric disorders, identifying robustly associated specific DNA variants has proved challenging. In the pre-genomics era the genetic architecture (number, frequency and effect size of risk variants) of complex genetic disorders was unknown. Empirical evidence for the genetic architecture of psychiatric disorders is emerging from the genetic studies of the last five years. Methods and scope We review the methods investigating the polygenic nature of complex disorders.
    [Show full text]
  • The BRCA1 Tumor Suppressor
    Journal of Translational Science Review Article ISSN: 2059-268X The BRCA1 tumor suppressor: potential long-range interactions of the BRCA1 promoter and the risk of breast cancer Beata Anna Bielinska* Department of Molecular and Translational Oncology, Maria Sklodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology, Poland Abstract Breast cancer is a complex disease with different phenotypes associated with genetic and non-genetic risk factors. An aberrant expression of the BRCA1 tumor suppressor as well as dysfunction of BRCA1 protein caused by germline mutations are implicated in breast cancer aethiology. BRCA1 plays a crucial role in genome and epigenome stability. Its expression is auto regulated and modulated by various cellular signals including metabolic status, hypoxia, DNA damage, estrogen stimulation. The review describes breast cancer risk factors, the BRCA1 gene expression and functions as well as covers the role of long-range genomic interactions, which emerge as regulators of gene expression and moderators of genomic communication. The potential long-range interactions of the BRCA1 promoter (driven by polymorphic variant rs11655505 C/T, as an example) and their possible impact on the BRCA1 gene regulation and breast cancer risk are also discussed. Introduction efficiency of BRCA1 transcription [9]. However, to date the mechanism underlying effect of the BRCA1 promoter variant rs11655505 C>T Female breast cancer is one of the most common cancers worldwide remains unknown. with app.1.68 million cases diagnosed annually [1]. It is a complex disease characterized by molecular and phenotypic heterogeneity Besides high risk BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations, moderate risk observed both within populations and intra-individually, within mutations such as those found in DNA repair genes (CHEK2, ATM, single tumor cells in a spatiotemporal manner, as pointed out by PALB2) also demonstrate familial clustering.
    [Show full text]
  • Within-Sibship GWAS Improve Estimates of Direct Genetic Effects
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.433935; this version posted March 7, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. Within-sibship GWAS improve estimates of direct genetic effects Laurence J Howe1,2 *, Michel G Nivard3, Tim T Morris1,2, Ailin F Hansen4, Humaira Rasheed4, Yoonsu Cho1,2, Geetha Chittoor5, Penelope A Lind6,7,8, Teemu Palviainen9, Matthijs D van der Zee3, Rosa Cheesman10,11, Massimo Mangino12,13, Yunzhang Wang14, Shuai Li15,16,17, Lucija Klaric18, Scott M Ratliff19, Lawrence F Bielak19, Marianne Nygaard20,21, Chandra A Reynolds22, Jared V Balbona23,24, Christopher R Bauer25,26, Dorret I Boomsma3,27, Aris Baras28, Archie Campbell29, Harry Campbell30, Zhengming Chen31,32, Paraskevi Christofidou12, Christina C Dahm33, Deepika R Dokuru23,24, Luke M Evans24,34, Eco JC de Geus3,35, Sudheer Giddaluru36,37, Scott D Gordon38, K. Paige Harden39, Alexandra Havdahl40,41, W. David Hill42,43, Shona M Kerr18, Yongkang Kim24, Hyeokmoon Kweon44, Antti Latvala9,45, Liming Li46, Kuang Lin31, Pekka Martikainen47,48,49, Patrik KE Magnusson14, Melinda C Mills50, Deborah A Lawlor1,2,51, John D Overton27, Nancy L Pedersen14, David J Porteous25, Jeffrey Reid28, Karri Silventoinen47, Melissa C Southey17,52,53, Travis T Mallard39, Elliot M Tucker-Drob39, Margaret J Wright54, Social Science Genetic Association Consortium, Within Family
    [Show full text]
  • LDL Polygenic Risk Scores in Practice
    University of Copenhagen & Copenhagen University Hospital LDL polygenic risk scores in practice Anne Tybjærg-Hansen MD DMSc Professor, Chief Physician Copenhagen University Hospital and Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark FH Global Summit, Atlanta 211019 Outline • Introduction to polygenic risk score • Polygenic risk scores for LDL cholesterol and FH • Polygenic risk scores for CAD and FH – polygenic versus omnigenic scores • Take home message Introduction to polygenic risk score Genome-wide association study of LDL cholesterol (from GLGC) P<10-8 Willer CJ et al. Nat Genet 2013 Creating a polygenic score GWAS SNPs Individually: tiny effects ComBined: larger effect Effect of gene score on trait level 1.0 1.2 Odds ratio Genome-wide association study of LDL cholesterol Polygenic risk score P<10-8 Willer CJ et al. Nat Genet 2013 Genome-wide association studies (GWAS’) for lipids In sufficiently large samples, many ~ 100,000 previously non-significant loci would European ancestry become nominally significant, 95 loci although effect sizes are close to zero. ~ 600,000 ~85,000 non-Europeans ~200,000 >118 novel loci 7,898 non-Europeans (~268 known loci) 62 novel loci 30.4 mill SNPs Klarin et al. 2010 2013 2018 Polygenic risk scores for LDL cholesterol and Familial Hypercholesterolemia Rigshospitalet The Centre of Diagnostic Investigations Diagnostic criteria for FH 1/220 individuals • Definite FH: > 8 points • Probable FH: 6-8 points • Possible FH: 3-5 points • Unlikely FH: 0-2 points Mette Christoffersen 9 Rigshospitalet The Centre of Diagnostic Investigations Clinical vs. mutation diagnosis Polygenic cause? 20-40% High Lp(a)? 60-80 % Polygenic cause? Modified from Eur Heart J.
    [Show full text]
  • Selection Against Variants in the Genome Associated PNAS PLUS with Educational Attainment
    Selection against variants in the genome associated PNAS PLUS with educational attainment Augustine Konga,b,1, Michael L. Friggea, Gudmar Thorleifssona, Hreinn Stefanssona, Alexander I. Youngc, Florian Zinka, Gudrun A. Jonsdottira, Aysu Okbayd,e, Patrick Sulema, Gisli Massona, Daniel F. Gudbjartssona,b, Agnar Helgasona,f, Gyda Bjornsdottira, Unnur Thorsteinsdottira,g, and Kari Stefanssona,g,1 adeCODE genetics/Amgen Inc., Reykjavik 101, Iceland; bSchool of Engineering and Natural Sciences, University of Iceland, Reykjavik 101, Iceland; cWellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7BN, United Kingdom; dDepartment of Applied Economics, Erasmus School of Applied Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 3062 PA Rotterdam, The Netherlands; eInstitute for Behavior and Biology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 3062 PA Rotterdam, The Netherlands; fDepartment of Anthropology, University of Iceland, Reykjavik 101, Iceland; and gFaculty of Medicine, University of Iceland, Reykjavik 101, Iceland Edited by Andrew G. Clark, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, and approved December 5, 2016 (received for review July 22, 2016) Epidemiological and genetic association studies show that genet- 62 cohorts were used to determine the weightings for POLYEDU. ics play an important role in the attainment of education. Here, we We computed POLYEDU for over 150,000 Icelanders who were investigate the effect of this genetic component on the reproduc- directly genotyped with chip arrays and imputed for additional tive history of 109,120 Icelanders and the consequent impact on sequence variants discovered through whole-genome sequencing the gene pool over time. We show that an educational attainment of 8,453 Icelanders (20) (Materials and Methods). POLYEDU was polygenic score, POLYEDU, constructed from results of a recent scaled to an SD of 1, hereafter referred to as standard units (SUs).
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Use of Current Polygenic Risk Scores May Exacerbate Health Disparities
    PERSPECTIVE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0379-x Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacerbate health disparities Alicia R. Martin 1,2,3*, Masahiro Kanai 1,2,3,4,5, Yoichiro Kamatani 5,6, Yukinori Okada 5,7,8, Benjamin M. Neale 1,2,3 and Mark J. Daly 1,2,3,9 Polygenic risk scores (PRS) are poised to improve biomedical outcomes via precision medicine. However, the major ethical and scientific challenge surrounding clinical implementation of PRS is that those available today are several times more accurate in individuals of European ancestry than other ancestries. This disparity is an inescapable consequence of Eurocentric biases in genome-wide association studies, thus highlighting that—unlike clinical biomarkers and prescription drugs, which may indi- vidually work better in some populations but do not ubiquitously perform far better in European populations—clinical uses of PRS today would systematically afford greater improvement for European-descent populations. Early diversifying efforts show promise in leveling this vast imbalance, even when non-European sample sizes are considerably smaller than the largest studies to date. To realize the full and equitable potential of PRS, greater diversity must be prioritized in genetic studies, and summary statistics must be publically disseminated to ensure that health disparities are not increased for those individuals already most underserved. RS, which predict complex traits on the basis of genetic All studies to date using well-powered genome-wide association data, are of burgeoning interest to the clinical community, as studies (GWAS) to assess the predictive value of PRS across a range Presearchers demonstrate their growing power to improve clini- of traits and populations have made a consistent observation: PRS cal care, genetic studies of a wide range of phenotypes increase in predict individual risk far more accurately in Europeans than non- size and power, and genotyping costs plummet to less than US$50.
    [Show full text]
  • Genomic Prediction of 16 Complex Disease Risks Including Heart Attack, Diabetes, Breast and Prostate Cancer Louis Lello1, Timothy G
    www.nature.com/scientificreports Corrected: Author Correction OPEN Genomic Prediction of 16 Complex Disease Risks Including Heart Attack, Diabetes, Breast and Prostate Cancer Louis Lello1, Timothy G. Raben1, Soke Yuen Yong1, Laurent C. A. M. Tellier2,3 & Stephen D. H. Hsu1,2,3 We construct risk predictors using polygenic scores (PGS) computed from common Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) for a number of complex disease conditions, using L1-penalized regression (also known as LASSO) on case-control data from UK Biobank. Among the disease conditions studied are Hypothyroidism, (Resistant) Hypertension, Type 1 and 2 Diabetes, Breast Cancer, Prostate Cancer, Testicular Cancer, Gallstones, Glaucoma, Gout, Atrial Fibrillation, High Cholesterol, Asthma, Basal Cell Carcinoma, Malignant Melanoma, and Heart Attack. We obtain values for the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) in the range ~0.58–0.71 using SNP data alone. Substantially higher predictor AUCs are obtained when incorporating additional variables such as age and sex. Some SNP predictors alone are sufcient to identify outliers (e.g., in the 99th percentile of polygenic score, or PGS) with 3–8 times higher risk than typical individuals. We validate predictors out-of-sample using the eMERGE dataset, and also with diferent ancestry subgroups within the UK Biobank population. Our results indicate that substantial improvements in predictive power are attainable using training sets with larger case populations. We anticipate rapid improvement in genomic prediction as more case- control data become available for analysis. Many important disease conditions are known to be signifcantly heritable1. Tis means that genomic predictors and risk estimates for a large number of diseases can be constructed if enough case-control data is available.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Risk Score Based on Statistical Learning Florian Prive
    Genetic risk score based on statistical learning Florian Prive To cite this version: Florian Prive. Genetic risk score based on statistical learning. Bioinformatics [q-bio.QM]. Université Grenoble Alpes, 2019. English. NNT : 2019GREAS024. tel-02476202 HAL Id: tel-02476202 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02476202 Submitted on 12 Feb 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. 1 THÈSE Pour obtenir le grade de DOCTEUR DE LA COMMUNAUTE UNIVERSITE GRENOBLE ALPES Spécialité : MBS - Modèles, méthodes et algorithmes en biologie, santé et environnement Arrêté ministériel : 25 mai 2016 Présentée par Florian PRIVÉ Thèse dirigée par Michael BLUM, Directeur de recherche CNRS, Université Grenoble Alpes, et co-encadrée par Hugues ASCHARD, chercheur Institut Pasteur préparée au sein du Laboratoire Techniques de L'Ingénierie Médicale et de la Complexité - Informatique, Mathématiques et Applications. dans l’École Doctorale Ingénierie pour la santé la Cognition et l'Environnement Score de risque génétique utilisant de l'apprentissage statistique. Genetic
    [Show full text]
  • A Complex Trait Genomics Approach to Investigating Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis
    A Complex Trait Genomics Approach to Investigating Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Restuadi Bachelor of Science, Master of Bioinformatics (Advanced) https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8434-4465 A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2020 Institute For Molecular Bioscience 2 Abstract Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is the most common form of motor neuron disease (MND). It is a fatal neurodegenerative disease that has a lifetime risk of 1 in 300 people worldwide, with death often occurring within 3 to 5 years from the onset of symptoms. Currently, there is no effective treatment and no cure for ALS, in part due to a limited understanding of its aetiology. Most ALS genetics research to date is driven by discoveries in the familial form of the disease, where causality seems to reflect a heritable single gene mutation. Only a small proportion of ALS research is focussed on investigating the cause of sporadic ALS, which is likely to be a complex genetic disorder with many factors contributing to its aetiology, including genetic and environmental risk factors. The traditional ALS genetic research approaches which only rely on familial data or the single-trait Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS) paradigm might not be ideal for studying complex disorders like ALS. Therefore, the research presented in this thesis aims to study the aetiology of ALS using statistical techniques that have been developed for genetic analysis of complex traits applied to publicly available summary statistics level GWAS and multi-omics data. Newly available gut microbiome data was also used to understand non-genetic factors on the development of disease.
    [Show full text]
  • An Epigenome-Wide Association Study Meta-Analysis of Educational Attainment
    Supplementary note to accompany An epigenome-wide association study meta-analysis of educational attainment 1 Study overview ................................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Sample inclusion criteria ........................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Phenotype definition and sample descriptive statistics ........................................................ 4 1.3 DNA methylation measurement and cohort-level quality control (QC) ............................ 4 2 Epigenome-wide association study (EWAS) ................................................................... 6 2.1.1 Control variables in the adjusted model .............................................................................. 6 2.1.2 Cohort-specific control variables ........................................................................................ 7 2.2 Description of major steps in meta-level quality-control (QC) analyses ............................ 7 2.3 Meta-analysis ........................................................................................................................... 7 2.4 Results – Epigenome-wide association study ........................................................................ 8 2.4.1 Quality control results ......................................................................................................... 8 2.4.1 EWAS results .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]